You are going to want to work on what will have the most impact over the next year? There are is only one way to achieve this goal. Connect your engagement factors to performance indicators such as revenue, profitability, productivity, and turnover. Some organizations turn to consulting firms like ours that have already facilitated this process in a generic manner across many data points, and others want to create a more targeted correlation based on their business. Obviously, the second and more pinpointed way to determine impact, a validation study, is more expensive. Either way, this is a very different avenue from choosing items based on whether they were rated low versus rated high. We break down engagement indicators into four key categories.

Top Targets (Low Rating, High Impact)

The items in this category represent what an organization will want to focus on during the next period; usually a year. These are items that receive low ratings from employees in a survey and also have the greatest impact on issues such as productivity, retention, and organizational results. Working on these particular issues will not only have the greatest impact on an organization’s employee engagement results, but it will also have the maximum impact on the organization’s success.

High Priorities (High Rating, High Impact)

These items are important to leverage or maintain and should be an organization’s next focus. These items received high ratings and also have significant impact on the organization’s success. Consider these items strengths that are working to the organization’s advantage. If these items fall backward in ratings, performance of the organization will suffer.

Average Priorities (Low Rating, Low Impact)

These items reflect low ratings and low impact. Essentially, they are organizational weaknesses that have little impact on the performance of an organization. These items typically will not influence productivity or retention a great deal. However, any item(s) rated low should be reviewed to determine if there is a pattern in the ratings that tells a story, or there is a need to shore up a real weakness because it is getting in the way.

Low Priorities (High Rating, Low Impact)

The items reflect strengths of an organization, because they are rated highly by employees on a survey, but they typically have little impact on issues like productivity, retention, and organizational results. While we try not to fall backward on these types of items, the impact of falling backward would most likely be negligible. We would not recommend an organization spend its time focusing in this area.

When we work with clients, there are times we need to steer them away from some of the items rated low because we know from our research that working on those items will not produce the results that addressing another item will.

United States spends more than $720 million annually on improving employee engagement, according 2012 research from industry analysts Bersin & Associates. The Center for Creative Leadership, PerformancePoint, Kenexa, and Gallop also track engagement figures. Some of the recent stats include:

a majority of employees (58 to 90 percent) do not trust management

only 14 to 58 percent of employees believe that management is ethical and honest

only 15 to 30 percent of employees are actually engaged.

Think about it: If we spend more than $720 million each year, why is engagement so low?

Bersin & Associates noted in 2012 that in the United States alone, we spend more than $720 million annually on improving employee engagement. According to sources such as the Center for Creative Leadership, PerformancePoint, Kenexa, and Gallup, between 58% and 90% of employees do not trust management, between 14% and 58% believe that management is ethical and honest, and between 15% and 30% are actually engaged. Think about it! If we spend more than $720 million a year, why are we getting
those results?

It doesn’t end with the survey We know engagement efforts work at times. Study after study demonstrates that engagement improves productivity, reduces absenteeism, improves customer satisfaction, allows organizations to be more innovative, creates a safer work environment, and improves retention. So why is it that only 16% of companies that use engagement surveys see positive results? Why is it that only 65% of employees feel they are thriving at work? There are several reasons that is happening:

(1) Leadership doesn’t recognize it as a significant problem. I realize it’s taboo to say that. However, if we were looking at a capital expenditure, such as machinery that was functioning at the levels we just described, leadership would do something and be committed to real results.

(2) People see engagement efforts as simply administering a survey. Surveys don’t solve problems; they give you information. Surveys are a view of the past, much like looking in the rear-view mirror of your car. They tell you very little about where you are going, but a great deal about where you have been. Surveys aren’t bad; however, many organizations misuse them, and they end up not serving any purpose or sometimes hurting the company.

(3) We use survey results to fix symptoms and create action plans. Action planning lasts for two to three months, and then most managers go back to “business as usual.” There are no long-term substantial changes in the organization. Even when the survey concludes that there are issues with work relationships or lack of training and development, organizations respond to what they see in the data, which typically has to do with an item or a question in the survey. The problem is that the results tell you what to focus on but usually don’t tell you why it’s an issue. It’s impossible to address the issue unless you find out why it became a problem. To determine the cause, you have
to dig, and that’s uncomfortable and challenging.

(4) We spend most of our money measuring, not changing. If we are going to change, we need to look across the organization at the cultural attributes that cause us to struggle with achieving engagement. Send the right message Culture is in the stories people tell, the symbols people hold up or see, and the rituals we follow in our organizations. For instance, some organizations assign parking places based on seniority or level in the
company. That describes a culture in which certain people are valued more than others and employees’ value isn’t built on their productivity or work product but on their status. There are organizations with beautiful, well-tended corporate headquarters, yet their manufacturing plants or retail branches need significant repairs or contain broken equipment that hinders employees’ performance. That sends a message that corporate is more valued than the people in the field doing the work.

What are the messages you’re sending your people through your culture?

Do you have an interest in running an Employee Engagement survey, but worry if it is good timing? Chances are it is good timing. Here are some of the excuses we have heard for postponing surveys and why they don’t hold water.

Is it a good time if we have a new President or CEO?

It would be a great way for a new President or CEO to let employees know that it is a new day and that they are interested in them. It should be very impactful if it is rolled out properly. Also it may help the new leader in developing a strategic plan that has buy in across the employee based if the questions are strong.

We have had a lot of change going on, maybe this is not the right time?With all the changes that are occurring it would convey to the employees that the Company recognizes this period maybe difficult, but also indicate to them that even though we can’t solve all of their problems with patience on their part we will be developing plans to address various employee issues.

We have so many HR priorities I am not sure the survey should be at the top of the list.

A survey would contribute to various HR related priorities such as an HR audit by helping identify what the HR goals should be and the organizational structure and strategy to attain those goals. It would also clearly indicate the type of support from HR that managers need to be more effective leaders.

A survey could contribute to the development of the new policy manual/handbook in that you would hear about any policies, benefits, communication programs, etc. that are a concern and need to be addressed. You might also learn about the consistency of administration of these policies and programs.

We have some initiatives coming up, maybe we should wait until after they are complete and people have had a chance to see what things will be like.

If done correctly employees will feel they have had input into the future of the organization. People react better to change when it happens with them rather than to them. And times of change typically reduce productivity. This process has the ability to improve productivity or at least stop the productivity drop.

And as management demonstrates responsiveness a heightened level of credibility will be achieved.

You see there is rarely a good time or a bad time for an Engagement Survey. Survey results are just news. How we interpret the news makes it good or bad. If we see it as data, information we now have we can do something with it or about it. Without the news we are running our companies blind. Some people think that the news won’t exist if a survey is never done. But I have news for them…it does. The news is there hiding in the darkness. It is shared in the break room, at the water cooler, and in gossip which can now be shared with many via technology. They know what is going on. They know the news. Don’t you think it is about time you do too!

What other excuses have you heard? Share them in the comments section.

The South African employee engagement sphere is an exciting space to work in as we accommodate both international trends and local nuances. The combination of a growing awareness of the necessity of fully integrated employee engagement practices, and an increased willingness on the part of corporates to step out of comfort and complacency zones, makes stimulating and ground breaking working possible for employee engagement specialists.

2013 saw some definite shifts which give indications for 2014 – some necessitated by economics, others by the changing world of technology. There are clear and significant trends that are being seen in the employee engagement world and then there are gut-feel changes that we take into account in our forward planning for clients – in the past we have invariably been proven right.

Infobesity

The approximate number of advertising messages that the modern consumer sees in a day is 350,000. And your internal marketing messages are added onto that. Is it any wonder that they get lost if they aren’t strategic, carefully planned and highly engaging? Recipients want short, sharp messaging; which brings us to…

Simplosion

Make an impact by keeping communication clear, single-minded and simple. Word-heavy is out.

Off desk and into hand. Internationally, employers are recognising that cross-device digital participation is essential to reach on-the-goers and Generations Y and Z. It is the most effective way to reach employees in a non-alienating way, in their private space and downtime. Noticeboards are disappearing and emails increasingly ignored or fast-scanned with reduced absorption and engagement. The increased integration of digital devices means single messaging reaching all touch points.

Democratise

The HO big brother’s voice is fading. Effective and engaged internal communication means integrating the function across all departmental silos and allowing organic dissemination of messaging. Clearer meaning and stronger buy-in is the result. Employees need to own a piece of the pie.

Toss the cookie cutter

This need has grown beyond the tailored-communication savvy under 35s, to most employee groups. Horizontal and vertical customisation of messages have become strategically essential across job level, age, technology adoption and line function. Individualisation is the entry point to effective communication.

Face to face

An interesting and perhaps ironic retro-trend: The expressed need for mindful, one-on-one communication and messaging interaction. In the face of the reality of distance communication, electronic contact and mass messaging in all its forms, engaged employees value ‘me-time’: having their voices heard in a real-life context.

Breaking news

Distance working and a need for instant buy-in necessitates dual delivery strategies: long-term strategic rollouts as well as instantaneous messaging. Employers cannot be perceived as slow in providing information – it’s a race against Twitter, Facebook, BBM… Wikileaks has nothing on employee grapevine information.

Socialise

If you’re not in, employees will believe you are ‘out’. Honest, effective, 360-degree integrated communication across all social media is more of a necessity than a ‘nice-to-have’.

Intrapreneurship

A growing engagement trend is the encouraging of employees to innovate and grow their own business ideas alongside their mainstream duties, giving them permission and support to grow.

Hardcore

Soft issues have become core issues – and hard issues. Employee engagement is being seen as a necessity and being placed high on executive agendas as a strategic imperative.

Measurement

ROI impact is widely recognised and now more actively and accurately measured as a cross-section of industries adopts employee engagement as a priority. EE measurement must be part and parcel of every other monthly measurement by a business.

Twenty-one percent of full-time employees plan to change jobs in 2014, the largest amount in the post-recession era up from 17 percent in 2013.

Only fifty-nine percent of workers are satisfied with their jobs, down from 66 percent in 2013.

Workers more likely to change jobs than others appear to be responding to these factors:

• Workers who are dissatisfied with their job: 58 percent plan to change jobs in the New Year
• Workers who are dissatisfied with advancement opportunities at current company: 45 percent
• Workers who are dissatisfied with their work-life balance: 39 percent
• Workers who feel underemployed: 39 percent
• Workers who are highly stressed: 39 percent
• Workers who have a poor opinion of their boss’s performance: 37 percent
• Workers who feel they were overlooked for a promotion: 36 percent
• Workers who have been with their company two years or less: 35 percent
• Worker who didn’t receive a pay increase in 2013: 28 percent

Typically, the focus has been on company-wide initiatives from HR and the role of the manager.

Those are definitely good starting points, but what about the individual employees themselves?

The cynics will say this is just pushing it all on the employee or that it enables out of touch C-level executives to say, “It’s their fault not ours!”

But we can’t be afraid to have an honest conversation around the importance of intrinsic motivation, and an individual’s obligation to be engaged and to drive the engagement of others.

Taking lessons from the positive psychology movement, there are three things people can can to proactively increase their own level of happiness and engagement at work.

First, employees need to identify the motivation triggers that matter to them most. While research will tell us what drivers are most important for the masses, we are all individuals. For example, I may really crave growth opportunities at the early stage of my career, while you might be more interested in recognition as you approach retirement.

Second, we need to teach employees to be mindful of all that companies and managers are already doing to drive engagement. One effective activity is to ask employees to write down all the things the company does to foster a specific area, like Communication. Some employees will write “Nothing” or “Weekly staff meeting”. But then share a long generic list of what many companies do, including items like: one-on-one meetings, team meetings, town hall meetings, company newsletter, intranet, annual performance reviews, yammer, and on and on. Then ask employees to circle all the items that their own company is indeed doing, and usually the revised list is much longer than their original list. An “aha” moment occurs when they realize, “I guess they are doing a lot more on communication than I realized.”

Third, we need to teach employees how to proactively partner with their bosses. You think communication is lacking? Great, huddle with your supervisor to suggest specific actions that can improve the situation. Don’t think the company is supporting your growth? OK, how can you hold a career path meeting with your supervisor to discuss your goals and what it’s going to take to accomplish them. What individual workers need is the understanding that they actually have an obligation to contact their supervisor if they aren’t satisfied; we can give them tools like model emails and “conversation starters” to help them navigate these conversations.

Employee engagement should have C-level support and management training and evaluation is critical, and we must also recognize what each individual brings to the table and teach them that driving engagement to higher and higher levels is a job for everyone.